ArticlePDF Available

A comparison of effects of fish and beef protein on satiety in normal weight men

Authors:
Article

A comparison of effects of fish and beef protein on satiety in normal weight men

Abstract and Figures

Previous studies have indicated that fish protein may have a greater effect on satiety compared to other protein sources of animal origin. To compare the effects of fish protein and beef protein meals on hunger and satiety. Twenty-three normal non-smoking, healthy males aged 20-32 years, body mass index 22.5+/-1.8 (s.d.) kg/m(2) participated in a study, with within-subjects design and 1 week between test days. In the morning of the test days, subjects received a standardized breakfast. Four hours after breakfast, subjects were served an iso-energetic protein-rich (40 energy % protein) lunch meal, consisting of either a fish protein dish or a beef protein dish. Four hours after the start of the lunch meals, an ad libitum standardized evening meal was served and the intake of food was measured. Appetite was rated by visual analogue scales (VAS) immediately before and after the meals, as well as every hour between the meals. After the evening meal until bedtime, subjects were asked to record in detail foods and drinks consumed. The repeated VAS-ratings of hunger, satiety and prospective consumption were modelled in a random effects model, taking pre-lunch VAS-ratings into account. After the fish meal, the point estimates were lower for hunger (-2+/-4.8), higher for satiety (8.7+/-6.0) and lower for prospective consumption (-4.9+/-4.7), but they did not reach statistical significance (P satiety=0.88; P hunger=0.15; P prospective=0.30). However, the energy intake at the evening meal displayed significant differences with subjects eating less after the fish protein lunch (2765 vs 3080 KJ, P<0.01) without feeling less satiated. No later energy compensation after the evening meal was found on the test day. Although no significant differences in VAS-ratings of satiety or hunger were detected, subjects displayed an 11% reduction in energy intake at the subsequent evening meal.
Content may be subject to copyright.
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
A comparison of effects of fish and beef protein on
satiety in normal weight men
S Borzoei
1
, M Neovius
1
, B Barkeling
1
, A Teixeira-Pinto
2,3
and S Ro
¨
ssner
1
1
Obesity Unit M73, Department of Internal Medicine, Karolinska University Hospital, Huddinge, Stockholm, Sweden;
2
Department of
Biostatistics and Medical Informatics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal and
3
Department of Biostatistics,
Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA
Background: Previous studies have indicated that fish protein may have a greater effect on satiety compared to other protein
sources of animal origin.
Objective: To compare the effects of fish protein and beef protein meals on hunger and satiety.
Design: Twenty-three normal non-smoking, healthy males aged 20–32 years, body mass index 22.571.8 (s.d.) kg/m
2
participated in a study, with within-subjects design and 1 week between test days. In the morning of the test days, subjects
received a standardized breakfast. Four hours after breakfast, subjects were served an iso-energetic protein-rich (40 energy %
protein) lunch meal, consisting of either a fish protein dish or a beef protein dish. Four hours after the start of the lunch meals, an
ad libitum standardized evening meal was served and the intake of food was measured. Appetite was rated by visual analogue
scales (VAS) immediately before and after the meals, as well as every hour between the meals. After the evening meal until
bedtime, subjects were asked to record in detail foods and drinks consumed.
Results: The repeated VAS-ratings of hunger, satiety and prospective consumption were modelled in a random effects model,
taking pre-lunch VAS-ratings into account. After the fish meal, the point estimates were lower for hunger (274.8), higher for
satiety (8.776.0) and lower for prospective consumption (4.974.7), but they did not reach statistical significance
(P
satiety
¼ 0.88; P
hunger
¼ 0.15; P
prospective
¼ 0.30). However, the energy intake at the evening meal displayed significant
differences with subjects eating less after the fish protein lunch (2765 vs 3080 KJ, Po0.01) without feeling less satiated. No later
energy compensation after the evening meal was found on the test day.
Conclusion: Although no significant differences in VAS-ratings of satiety or hunger were detected, subjects displayed an 11%
reduction in energy intake at the subsequent evening meal.
European Journal of Clinical Nutrition (2006) 60, 897–902. doi:10.1038/sj.ejcn.1602397; published online 15 February 2006
Keywords: appetite; beef; energy intake; fish; protein; satiety
Introduction
Most previous studies, comparing the short-term effect on
satiety of protein in comparison with carbohydrates and fat
in iso-energetic meals, have found protein to be the most
satiating macronutrient (Eisenstein et al., 2002; Westerterp-
Plantenga, 2003). Whether different sources of protein, for
example, fish protein vs meat protein, exert different effects
on satiety has been studied only to a limited extent. In a
study by Uhe et al. (1992), beef, chicken and fish protein
were compared. Subjects were served grilled whole chunks of
50 g of protein from each food type and were then asked to
rate repeatedly how hungry or full they felt during 180 min
following commencement of the meals. The results showed
that satiety was greater after the fish protein meal compared
to the other protein sources. In a study by Holt et al. (1995),
subjects were served 1000 KJ (240 kcal) of 38 different food
items and were then asked to rate subjective satiety every
15 min during 120 min. A satiety index (SI) was calculated for
Received 4 May 2005; revised 21 November 2005; accepted 12 December
2005; published online 15 February 2006
Correspondence: Professor S Ro¨ssner, Obesity Unit M73, Department of
Internal Medicine, Karolinska University Hospital, Huddinge, Stockholm SE-
141 86, Sweden.
E-mail: stephan.rossner@medhs.ki.se
Guarantor: SRo¨ssner.
Contributors: BB and SR designed the study. SB designed and cooked the test
meals. BB and SB recruited subjects and collected data. ATP and MN
conducted the statistical analyses. BB wrote the initial manuscript draft,
assisted by SR. None of the authors had any personal or financial conflicts of
interest with regard to the study.
European Journal of Clinical Nutrition (2006) 60, 897902
&
2006 Nature Publishing Group All rights reserved 0954-3007/06 $
30.00
www.nature.com/ejcn
each test food by dividing the area under the satiety response
curve with the area under the satiety response curve for the
reference food item, which consisted of white bread. The
results from this study indicated that fish protein had a
higher SI than all other protein-rich food items tested (e.g.
beef steak, eggs) and actually had the second highest SI of all
food items tested.
Although both these studies indicate that fish protein has
a significant effect on satiety compared to other protein
sources of animal origin, these studies do not reveal whether
the higher subjective satiety ratings when eating fish protein
actually affect subsequent food intake. Furthermore, there
are some methodological concerns regarding these previous
studies: in the study by Uhe et al. (1992), the texture of
whole fillets of beef and fish differed to a large extent, which
may have had an impact on the results. In the study by Holt
et al. (1995), the protein-rich food items tested differed
largely in protein content, with fish having the highest
protein content of all items tested (56 g of protein for fish
compared to 42 g of protein for beef, in the test portion).
The aim of the present study was to investigate whether
a lunch meal with fish protein had a different short-term
effect on satiety, compared to an iso-energetic lunch meal
with beef protein, by measuring the intake of a subsequent
ad libitum evening meal intake and subjective ratings of
appetite. The aim was also to make this comparison with
meals made of natural, commonly used foods instead of
synthetic meals and to keep the content of macronutrients
and fibre constant and the texture, appearance and taste as
similar as possible.
Subjects and methods
Subjects
Non-smoking healthy (i.e. without any known diseases)
males aged 20–50 years of age were invited by advertising at
university sites close to the Karolinska University Hospital.
Twenty-five male subjects were initially included in the
study. Two subjects were withdrawn from the study because
they failed to consume the entire test meals at lunch, which
was stated as inclusion criterion. Thus, 23 non-smoking,
healthy, young normal weight male subjects aged 2574
(mean7s.d.) years with body mass index 22.571.8 kg/m
2
completed the study. All participants had low scores (p50%
of the maximum score) on the cognitive restraint scale
measured by the short revised 18-item Three-Factor Eating
Questionnaire (TFEQ) (Karlsson et al., 2000).
Measurements of appetite and food intake
Ratings of subjective feelings of appetite, that is, desire to eat,
hunger, satiety and how much they could eat (prospective
consumption) were made by visual analogue scales (VAS)
(Rogers and Blundell, 1990; Barkeling et al., 1995). For
example, the question ‘How strong is your desire to eat
now?’ was rated along a 100 mm scale anchored with ‘Not
strong at all’ on the left and ‘Very, very strong’ on the right.
Subjects were asked to make a vertical mark across the line
corresponding to their feeling at the present time. A further
VAS was used at the end of the lunch meals where subjects
rated how pleasant they had found the meal. Quantification
of the VAS-ratings was made by measuring in mm the
distance from the left of the line to the mark.
Since the meal at the ad libitum dinner was of a
homogeneous type, the energy intake of the food ingested
was simply calculated by measuring the weight of the food
eaten. The energy intake from after dinner until bedtime was
calculated from a food diary, where participants recorded in
detail everything they consumed, giving detailed information
on type of food and amounts, using household measures.
Meals
The standardized, typical Swedish breakfast, which had to be
entirely consumed by the participants, consisted of three
slices of white bread (90 g), low-fat margarine (10 g), cheese
17% fat (45 g), a glass of orange juice (178 g), cucumber slices
(15 g), slices of bell pepper (15 g) and a cup of coffee or tea.
The breakfast energy content was 2093 KJ (500 kcal) (protein
23.5 g (19 energy % (E%)), fat 15.5 g (27 E%), carbohydrate
65.8 g (53 E%), fibre 2.2 g).
The two lunch meals were of the same energy, macro-
nutrient and fibre content (Tables 1 and 2) and differed only
in type of protein (beef vs fish). They consisted of boiled
rice with a sauce of minced meat or minced fish. In order to
make the texture of the meals as similar as possible, fillet of
beef and of cod were minced in mincing-machine with a
hole size of 3 mm, before pan frying. Appearance and taste
of the meals were made similar by colouring the minced
cod and beef fillet with canned tomatoes and tomato paste,
and by spicing with a generous amount of dried basil. The
appearance of the prepared meals was almost identical,
except that the fish protein meal was slightly more pale in
colour than the beef protein meal. This meal would be
considered a normal dish by the volunteers.
The ad libitum evening meal served was an excess portion
(1000 g) of a homogeneous, industrially produced typical
Swedish hash dish with a standard energy content of 700 KJ
(170 kcal)/100 g (protein 6 g (15 E%), fat 8 g (45 E%),
carbohydrate 16 g (40 E%)) consisting of diced beef meat,
onions and potatoes mixed and fried (Oxpytt, Findus, Bjuv,
Sweden), which is a common Swedish dish.
Procedure
Each subject participated twice, eating each type of test
meal (fish/beef) in a counterbalanced order with 1 week in
between test days. The day prior to the first test day, subjects
were instructed to write a food and physical activity diary
and were then asked to maintain these registered meal and
activity patterns including bedtime at the day before the
Effects of fish and beef protein on satiety in normal weight men
S Borzoei et al
898
European Journal of Clinical Nutrition
next test day, with emphasis on eating the last meal of the
day at the same hour. This was checked in detail upon arrival
on the second test day. Subjects were also instructed not to
drink alcohol the day prior to test days and also to refrain
from eating and drinking, except for water after 2200 hours.
Subjects arrived fasting to the clinic in the morning of the
test days (at the same hour each test day) and were served
a standardized breakfast (for content see above). Before
breakfast, on the first test day, body weight and height were
measured. Four hours after the start of the breakfast,
participants were served the lunch meal, consisting of either
a fish protein dish or a beef protein dish (see Table 1 for
content) with a glass of water throughout the meal, and were
asked to consume the entire meal. Four hours after the start
of the lunch meals, an ad libitum standardized evening meal
(for content see above) was served and participants were
asked to eat until satisfied.
VAS scales to monitor subjective feelings of appetite were
applied immediately before and after the meals, as well as
every hour between the meals. During the whole test days
until after the evening meal, all volunteers performed only
sedentary activities such as reading and studying.
After the evening meal, participants were allowed to leave
the laboratory but were asked to record in detail in a food
diary all foods and drinks, including caffeine-containing
drinks, consumed for the rest of the day until bedtime for
further calculations of the energy intake. Subjects were also
asked to record physical activities. These food and activity
diaries were mailed back and if necessary a dietitian called
the subjects by phone to get additional information.
The participants were informed that they were taking part
in a study to test the palatability and the experience of
appetite of different meals. The content of the meals served
was not described and no mention that food intake was
measured at dinner meals was made. In order to distract
subjects from the purpose of the study, they were given after
each lunch meal an open-ended questionnaire on the taste,
appearance, texture, smell and size of the meal.
Statistics
Statistical analyses were conducted using SAS (version 9, SAS
Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA). All values are expressed as
means7s.d.’s, unless otherwise specified. The level of
significance was set at 0.05. Paired t-tests were performed
for comparisons of subsequent energy intake and VAS-ratings
measuring appetite at single time points. The post-prandial
time period from immediately after lunch to before dinner
was of particular interest for evaluating the effect of the
protein meals. In order to take into account the repeated
measures for each subject, a separate linear model with
random intercept was fitted for hunger, satiety and prospec-
tive consumption using PROC MIXED. Although there
were no significant differences in the baseline VAS-ratings
(measurement at 11.55), these were subtracted from each
measurement after lunch as an adjustment for baseline. Time
of the measurement and type of meal were the covariates
used in the models. Interaction terms (type of meal time)
were tested but were not significant (all P40.05) and
therefore excluded from the final models.
Results
Energy intake
At the ad libitum evening meal, 4 h after the consumption of
the protein meals, 17 of the total 23 subjects ate less food
Table 1 The beef protein lunch meal
Weight (g) Energy (KJ) Protein (g) Fat (g) CHO (g) Fibre (g)
Beef, fillet (minced) 322 1345 64.4 6.8 0.0 0.0
Rice (cooked) 150 791 3.9 0.6 41.4 0.5
Water 61
Tomatoes (paste) 40 65 0.7 0.0 3.0 1.0
Tomatoes (canned) 40 42 0.3 0.1 2.0 0.6
Bell pepper (red) 30 35 0.4 0.2 1.4 0.6
Leek 20 23 0.6 0.0 0.7 0.4
Margarine 7 209 0.0 5.6 0.1 0.0
Basil (dried) 2 20 0.3 0.1 1.2 0.8
Total 672 2532 70.6 13.4 49.7 3.8
Energy % 47 20 33
Table 2 The fish protein lunch meal
Weight
(g)
Energy
(KJ)
Protein
(g)
Fat
(g)
CHO
(g)
Fibre
(g)
Cod fillet (minced) 378 1192 64.3 2.6 0.0 0.0
Rice (cooked) 150 791 3.9 0.6 41.4 0.5
Tomatoes (paste) 40 65 0.7 0.0 3.0 1.0
Tomatoes (canned) 40 42 0.3 0.1 2.0 0.6
Bell pepper (red) 30 35 0.4 0.2 1.4 0.6
Leek 20 23 0.6 0.0 0.7 0.4
Margarine 12 364 0.1 9.8 0.1 0.0
Basil (dried) 2 20 0.3 0.1 1.2 0.8
Total 672 2532 70.6 13.4 49.7 3.8
Energy % 47 20 33
Effects of fish and beef protein on satiety in normal weight men
S Borzoei et al
899
European Journal of Clinical Nutrition
after the fish protein lunch meal compared to after the
beef protein lunch meal. The mean energy intake at the
evening meal was 280571095 after the fish protein lunch
compared to 31337904 KJ after the beef protein lunch
(P ¼ 0.007; Figure 1). The meal duration was similar on
both occasions. The energy intake from after dinner until
bedtime calculated from the subjects’ food diaries revealed
no energy compensation later in the day: when including
all subjects in the analyses, the energy intakes after dinner
until bedtime were 290171924 and 289171571 KJ on the
fish protein and beef protein test days, respectively. Five of
the 23 subjects consumed alcohol during the evening, after
they left the laboratory. Two of the subjects consumed
alcohol only in the evening after the fish protein day. Two
of the subjects consumed alcohol after both test days,
although in larger amounts after the fish protein day,
and one subject consumed alcohol only after the beef
protein day. Since consumption of alcohol adds to the
energy intake from food and may also have an appetite-
stimulating effect (Yeomans et al., 2003), a further calcula-
tion of the evening energy intake was performed, where the
five subjects which had consumed alcohol in the evening of
the test days were excluded from the analyses. The energy
intakes after dinner until bedtime for the remaining 18
non-alcohol consumers were 227871651 and 262271492 KJ
(P ¼ 0.44) at the fish protein and beef protein test days,
respectively. Caffeine intake did not differ between study
occasions.
Subjective ratings of appetite
Subjective ratings of appetite were collected during the
whole test days. As an example, the temporal profile for
hunger is shown in Figure 2. At the time point immediately
after the lunch meals, subjective ratings revealed that
subjects experienced less hunger (678vs14718, Po0.05),
were more satiated (84715 vs 74720, Po0.05) and thought
they could eat less ((prospective consumption) 12712 vs
23721, Po0.01) after the fish protein lunch meal compared
with after the beef protein lunch meal.
In Figure 3, subjective ratings of satiety are shown as
changes in ratings from pre-lunch meal levels (delta values).
In the random effects models, taking all the ratings between
the meals into account, adjusting for baseline score and type
of meal, hunger increased by 9.170.6 units/h, satiety
decreased by 11.670.7 units/h and prospective consumption
increased by 8.670.5 units/h, on average. Although the
point estimates (Table 3) for the regression coefficients for
fish indicated less hunger (274.8), greater satiety (8.77
6.0) and reduced prospective consumption (4.974.7),
none of them reached statistical significance (P
satiety
¼ 0.88;
P
hunger
¼ 0.15; P
prospective
¼ 0.29). When not adjusting for the
nonsignificant difference in VAS scores before lunch (at 1155
Ad libitum meal
(
Fish
)
Ad libitum meal
(
Meat
)
3000
2000
1000
0
Mean, Kilojoule
Figure 1 Mean energy intake (KJ) at the ad libitum meal after the
meat and fish protein meal (n ¼ 23).
0
20
40
60
80
1
00 Hunger
Beef protein
Fish protein
7:55 8:00
After
breakfast
9:00
Standardized
breakfast
10:00 11:00 11:55 12:00
Protein-rich
lunch
After
lunch
13:00 14:00 15:00 15:55 16:00
Ad libitum
dinner
After
dinne
r
Figure 2 Ratings of hunger during test days are shown. The study
procedure until lunch is identical on both occasions. After lunch, the
effects on ratings of eating the fish protein vs the beef protein lunch
meals are shown. Mean and s.e.m. are given.
0
20
40
60
80
100 SATIETY
Beef protein
Fish protein
12:00
Lunch
After
lunch
13:00 14:00 15:00 15:55
Before dinner
Figure 3 Changes in ratings of satiety after the intake of lunch
meals with fish protein and beef protein are shown. Mean and s.e.m.
are given.
Effects of fish and beef protein on satiety in normal weight men
S Borzoei et al
900
European Journal of Clinical Nutrition
hours), the signs of the coefficients were the same and they
reached statistical significance.
Immediately after the ad libitum dinner, there were no
differences in ratings of desire to eat, hunger, fullness and
prospective consumption, although subjects ate less after the
fish protein lunch meal.
Impressions of the type of meal
The beef protein meal was rated as more pleasant than the
fish protein meal (65716 vs 55723, Po0.05). The open-
ended questionnaires and the verbal comments from the
subjects revealed that they could not distinguish the two
equally spiced meals from each other. In a few cases, a ‘fishy’
smell was reported from either meal. The records from the
physical activity diaries did not reveal any significant
differences between test days (P40.05).
Discussion
This study demonstrates that a protein-rich lunch meal with
fish protein reduced subsequent energy intake compared
to an iso-energetic lunch meal of beef protein, in normal
weight young men. The subjective ratings of appetite did,
however, not display significant differences, although the
point estimates indicated effects in the same direction. These
results indicate that type of protein, that is, fish vs beef,
may be of importance for satiety, at least in a short-term
perspective. Certainly the satiating effects of fish may
depend on other factors than the protein content, such as
fat quality. Cod however is a very lean fish (0.7 g fat/100 g).
The rated pleasantness of eating the fish protein meal was
lower compared to the beef protein meal. A number of
studies have shown that palatability affects satiation, that
is, affects the amount of food eaten within a meal, with
an increased intake as palatability increases (Sorensen et al.,
2003). Whether palatability also affects satiety, that is,
subsequent hunger and satiety and subsequent ingestion of
food, has also been studied. The effect on post-prandial
appetite ratings after fixed pre-loads of different palatability,
but with the same nutritional content, where palatability has
been manipulated by adding flavours (not sweeteners), has
been examined in three studies (Rogers and Blundell, 1990;
Warwick et al., 1993; De Graaf et al., 1999). In one of the
studies (Warwick et al., 1993), hunger ratings were lower and
fullness greater after the more palatable meal. In the two
other studies (Rogers and Blundell, 1990; De Graaf et al.,
1999), there was no effect of palatability on post-prandial
appetite ratings. In these three studies (Rogers and Blundell,
1990; Warwick et al., 1993; De Graaf et al., 1999), the
effect on subsequent food intake was also measured 30 min,
90 min or 3 h after the pre-loads, and in none of them the
subsequent food intake was affected by the palatability.
In the present study, we wanted to use cooked lunch meals
made of commonly used food items (in contrast to synthetic
formulas), where the protein to be tested was incorporated.
The protein content of the lunch meals (47 E% of protein) in
this study was high. If lower protein content had been used,
possible differences in satiety effects between fish and beef
protein may not have been detectable.
The mechanisms for the reduction in subsequent energy
intake after the fish protein meal compared with the beef
protein meal were not tested in this study. However, in the
study by Uhe et al. (1992), comparing the satiety effect of
chunks of fillets of fish, beef and chicken, the plasma amino-
acid profiles, dietary amino-acid profiles, plasma glucose and
insulin were measured. A study by Hall et al. (2003) have
similarly described how casein and whey protein appear to
exert differential effects on satiety, possibly mediated by
post-absorptive increases in amino acids, cholecystokinin
and glucagon-like peptide 1 (CCK and GLP-1). The results
obtained after consuming fish differed significantly from
after consumption of beef and chicken in a number of
factors, which may be related to satiety. The tryptophan:
large neutral amino-acid (LNAA) ratio decline after the meal
was slower, the amino-acid concentration took longer to
reach peak levels and the dietary and plasma concentrations
of taurine and plasma concentration of methionine were
significantly higher after fish consumption compared to
after beef and chicken. As also pointed out by Uhe et al.
(1992), serontoninergic factors as well as slower digestibility
of fish proteins could help to explain our extended
observations of fish protein enhanced satiety.
Further long-term trials may help to reveal whether a fish
protein-rich diet may help to control energy balance.
References
Barkeling B, Rossner S, Sjoberg A 1995. Methodological studies on
single meal food intake characteristics in normal weight and obese
men and women. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord 19, 284–290.
De Graaf C, De Jong LS, Lambers AC 1999. Palatability affects
satiation but not satiety. Physiol Behav 66, 681–688.
Table 3 Summary of random effect models for hunger, satiety and
prospective consumption using time and meal as independent variables
b s.e. P-value
Hunger (BIC ¼ 1928.3)
Time 9.1 0.6 o0.001
Meal (beef ¼ 0, fish ¼ 1) 2.0 4.8 0.68
Satiety (BIC ¼ 1981.2)
Time 11.6 0.67 o0.001
Meal (beef ¼ 0, fish ¼ 1) 8.7 6.0 0.15
Prospective consumption (BIC ¼ 1854.6)
Time 8.6 0.51 o0.001
Meal (beef ¼ 0, fish ¼ 1) 4.9 4.7 0.29
BIC ¼ Bayesian information criterion; s.e. ¼ standard error.
VAS-ratings for hunger, satiety and prospective consumption were adjusted
for pre-lunch scores by subtraction.
Effects of fish and beef protein on satiety in normal weight men
S Borzoei et al
901
European Journal of Clinical Nutrition
Eisenstein J, Roberts SB, Dallal G, Saltzman E 2002. High-protein
weight-loss diets: are they safe and do they work? A review of the
experimental and epidemiologic data. Nutr Rev 60, 189–200.
Hall WL, Millward DJ, Long SJ, Morgan LM 2003. Casein and whey
exert different effects on plasma amino acid profiles, gastrointest-
inal hormone secretion and appetite. Br J Nutr 89, 239–248.
Holt SH, Miller JC, Petocz P, Farmakalidis E 1995. A satiety index of
common foods. Eur J Clin Nutr 49, 675–690.
Karlsson J, Persson LO, Sjostrom L, Sullivan M 2000. Psychometric
properties and factor structure of the Three-Factor Eating Ques-
tionnaire (TFEQ) in obese men and women. Results from the
Swedish Obese Subjects (SOS) study. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord
24, 1715–1725.
Rogers PJ, Blundell JE 1990. Umami and appetite: effects of
monosodium glutamate on hunger and food intake in human
subjects. Physiol Behav 48, 801–804.
Sorensen LB, Moller P, Flint A, Martens M, Raben A 2003. Effect
of sensory perception of foods on appetite and food intake:
a review of studies on humans. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord 27,
1152–1166.
Uhe AM, Collier GR, O’Dea K 1992. A comparison of the effects of
beef, chicken and fish protein on satiety and amino acid profiles
in lean male subjects. J Nutr 122, 467–472.
Warwick ZS, Hall WG, Pappas TN, Schiffman SS 1993. Taste and
smell sensations enhance the satiating effect of both a high-
carbohydrate and a high-fat meal in humans. Physiol Behav 53,
553–563.
Westerterp-Plantenga MS 2003. The significance of protein in food
intake and body weight regulation. Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care
6, 635–638.
Yeomans MR, Caton S, Hetherington MM 2003. Alcohol and food
intake. Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care 6, 639–644.
Effects of fish and beef protein on satiety in normal weight men
S Borzoei et al
902
European Journal of Clinical Nutrition
... As proteins have unique characteristics depending on the amino acid composition and absorption rate, it has been speculated whether proteins from different sources affect DIT and appetite differently. Studies on the impact of different protein sources on DIT are sparse, whereas the impact on appetite is more investigated [5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12]. However, the lack of adequate standardization and the use of different types of protein meals complicate the interpretation of these studies. ...
... Fish and seafood are the main dietary contributors to marine n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA), but fish also contains vitamin D, selenium, iodine, and high-quality proteins, all being crucial nutrients [13]. Protein from different fish sources has been shown to increase satiety and reduce ad libitum energy intake (EI) compared with animal proteins (beef, chicken, egg, or turkey) [5][6][7][8]. However, the majority of these studies have methodological shortcomings such as a varying protein content between the tested protein sources [6], texture differences and lack of information regarding weight of the test meals [5], or use of liquid test meals, which may not reflect the effect of foods in solid form [7,14]. ...
... However, PFC was lower after the salmon meal with high GI carbohydrates compared with the veal meal with low GI carbohydrates. Protein from different fish species such as ling fish, tuna, cod, and antarcticus has previously been shown to increase satiety compared with protein from animal sources [5,7,8]. Uhe et al. found increased satiety after consumption of fish (mustelus antarcticus) compared to beef and chicken [5]. ...
Article
Full-text available
The study investigated the acute effects of meals containing either salmon or veal in combination with carbohydrates with high or low glycemic index (GI) on diet-induced thermogenesis (DIT) (primary endpoint), appetite sensations, and energy intake (EI). Twenty-five overweight men and women ingested four iso-caloric test meals: salmon with mashed potatoes (high GI) (SM), salmon with wholegrain pasta (low GI) (SP), veal with mashed potatoes (VM) and veal with wholegrain pasta (VP). Energy expenditure was measured in the fasting state and six times postprandially for 25 min with 5-min breaks between each measurement. Appetite sensations were measured every 30 min. Blood samples, from arterialized venous blood, were drawn every 20 min until an ad libitum buffet-style lunch was served 3.5 h later. DIT was 40% higher after the SM meal compared to the SP meal (p = 0.002). Prospective food consumption was lower after the SM meal compared with the VP meal (p = 0.01). There were no differences in satiety, hunger, fullness, or ad libitum EI between the test meals (all p > 0.05). In conclusion, salmon with high GI carbohydrates increased DIT compared to salmon with low GI carbohydrates. This indicates that DIT is sensitive to the GI of the carbohydrates after intake of salmon but not veal.
... Only a few studies have reported on the specific acute postprandial effect of a meal with proteins from fish, compared to other protein sources (34)(35)(36). A comparison of the effects of isocaloric meals with proteins from beef, chicken, or fish revealed a significantly higher satiety score after the fish meal compared to the other protein sources (34). ...
... A comparison of the effects of isocaloric meals with proteins from beef, chicken, or fish revealed a significantly higher satiety score after the fish meal compared to the other protein sources (34). A study evaluating the effect on satiety when comparing a fish protein meal with a beef protein meal revealed that subjects receiving the fish-meal had lower hunger scores and consumed less energy in the subsequent evening meal (36). In contrast, a study investigating the acute effect of meals based on proteins from cod or veal in combination with carbohydrates high-or low-glycemic index did not find any differences in appetite sensation, energy intake, or postprandial response in glucose, insulin, or ghrelin levels when comparing the two different protein sources (35). ...
Article
Background: Fish protein hydrolysates are suggested to contain bioactive sequences capable of affecting metabolic pathways involved in the regulation of glucose metabolism and body weight when consumed in low doses. Modulation of the appetite-regulating hormone ghrelin may explain suppression of insulin secretion and weight loss observed in previous studies with fish protein hydrolysates. Objective: This study aimed to assess the effect of a single, low dose of cod protein hydrolysate (CPH) before a breakfast meal on postprandial acylated ghrelin concentration and sensations associated with appetite in healthy subjects. Design: In this explorative trial with a crossover design, 41 healthy individuals (15 males and 26 females, age 51 ± 6 years) completed 2 study days separated by 4-7 days of washout. On both study days, a test drink containing 20 mg CPH or casein (control) per kg body weight was given immediately before a standardized breakfast meal. Acylated ghrelin concentrations were measured before test drink/breakfast (baseline) and at time 0, 20, 40, 80, and 180 min postprandially. Sensations associated with appetite were measured by a Visual Analog Scale (100 mm) at baseline and 0, 20, 40, and 180 min postprandially. Results: Statistically, no difference was observed between CPH and control for postprandial acylated ghrelin concentrations (mean difference geometric mean: 1.05 pg/mL, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.97-1.13, P = 0.266), or between the total area under the curve (tAUC) for acylated ghrelin after CPH (tAUC = 17518 pg/mL × min, 95% CI: 0-47941) and control (tAUC = 17272 pg/mL × min, 95% CI: 0-48048, P = 0.991). No differences were found between CPH and control for sensation of appetite, according to tAUC of postprandial scores for satiety (P = 0.794) and the feeling of fullness (P = 0.996). Conclusion: We did not find an effect of a single dose of CPH on postprandial concentrations of acylated ghrelin or sensations related to feeling of hunger, compared to control. Further studies should aim to evaluate the effect of a supplement with CPH given daily over a period of time.
... Among animal proteins, eggs possess the greater potential to delay hunger as well as contain many other beneficial macros and micronutrients essential for health maintenance (145). Likewise, no difference was recorded in the satiating response of fish and beef protein (146). However, a significant decline in energy intake was observed at the subsequent meal after the consumption of fish. ...
Article
Full-text available
Food intake and body weight regulation are of special interest for meeting today’s lifestyle essential requirements. Since balanced energy intake and expenditure are crucial for healthy living, high levels of energy intake are associated with obesity. Hence, regulation of energy intake occurs through shortand longterm signals as complex central and peripheral physiological signals control food intake. This work aims to explore and compile the main factors influencing satiating eciency of foods by updating recent knowledge to point out new perspectives on the potential drivers of satiety interfering with food intake regulation. Human internal factors such as genetics, gender, age, nutritional status, gastrointestinal satiety signals, gut enzymes, gastric emptying rate, gut microbiota, individual behavioral response to foods, sleep andcircadian rhythmsarelikely tobeimportantindeterminingsatiety. Besides, theexternal factors (environmentalandbehavioral)impactingsatietyeciency are highlighted. Based on mechanisms related to food consumption and dietary patternsseveralphysical,physiological,andpsychologicalfactorsaect satiety or satiation. A complex network of endocrine and neuroendocrine mechanisms controls the satiety pathways. In response to food intake and other behavioral cues, gut signals enable endocrine systems to target the brain. Intestinal and gastric signals interact with neural pathways in the central nervous system to halt eating or induce satiety. Moreover, complex food composition and structures result in considerable variation in satiety responses for dierent food groups. A better understanding of foods and factors impacting the eciency of satiety could be helpful in making smart food choices and dietary recommendations for a healthy lifestyle based on updated scientific evidence.
... Sources of dietary protein differ in their amino acid composition and digestibility, and therefore may have different effects on appetite, satiety, and/or meal energy intake [7,8]. Several acute protein source comparison studies [9][10][11][12] have examined the effects of beef-derived protein on appetite, satiety, and/or meal energy intake. For example, Charlton and colleagues [12] compared the acute effects of beef, pork, and chicken on appetite regulatory hormones, subjective appetite sensations, and ad libitum meal energy intake and reported similar effects among the protein sources. ...
Article
Full-text available
Background/Objectives The purpose of this study was to evaluate the acute effects of ingesting beef- and insect-derived protein on postprandial plasma amino acid and appetite hormone concentrations, appetite sensations, and ad libitum energy intake. Subjects/Methods In a randomized, double-blind, crossover study, 20 young men (23 (SD: 4) y) completed two trials during which arterialized blood samples and VAS questionnaires were collected at baseline, and over 300-min after ingestion of beverages with similar energy and macronutrient content containing 25 g beef- or insect-derived (cricket) protein. Blood samples were analyzed for plasma amino acid and appetite hormone concentrations, while VAS questionnaires were applied to assess appetite sensations. After each trial, an ad libitum meal was immediately provided to assess energy intake. Results Adjusted mean postprandial incremental area under the curve (iAUC) was greater for cricket vs. beef-derived protein for plasma leucine, branched-chain amino acid, and essential amino acid concentrations (all P < 0.0001). Adjusted mean postprandial iAUC for hunger was lower following beef (−3030 (SE: 860)) vs. cricket-derived (−1197 (SE: 525)) protein (Difference: −1833 (95% CI: −3358, −308); P = 0.02), but was not different for other appetite sensations or appetite hormones (all P > 0.05). Adjusted mean ad libitum energy intake was 4072 (SE: 292) and 4408 (SE: 316) kJ following beef- and cricket-derived protein (Difference: −336 (95% CI: −992, 320); P = 0.30). Conclusion Acute ingestion of cricket and beef-derived protein leads to differences in postprandial plasma amino acid concentrations, but elicits similar effects on appetite hormones, appetite sensations, and ad libitum energy intake in young men.
... Cod protein hydrolysate consumed before breakfast gave a slight reduction in postprandial insulin response but no change in glucose or GLP-1 when compared to casein [44]. Participants consuming a meal containing cod versus beef had a lower energy intake later in the day, indicating a potential role of cod protein on satiety, despite no significant differences in hunger or satiety measurements [45]. ...
Article
Full-text available
Fish is considered an important part of a healthy diet, in part due to the content of long chain omega-3 fatty acids. However, both lean and fatty fish have beneficial health effects, suggesting that micronutrients and proteins may play a role. In a randomised, controlled, cross-over trial, five healthy male participants consumed 5.2 g of protein from either salmon fishmeal or whey. Blood samples were taken before and 30 and 60 min after intake. The concentration of glucose, lipids, hormones and metabolites, including 28 different amino acids and derivatives, were measured in serum or plasma. Cultured HepG2 cells were incubated with or without serum from the participants, and transcriptomic profiling was performed using RNA sequencing. The ingestion of both salmon fishmeal and whey reduced the glucose and triglyceride levels in serum. Protein intake, independent of the source, increased the concentration of 22 amino acids and derivatives in serum. Fishmeal increased the concentration of arginine, methionine, serine, glycine, cystathionine and 2-aminobutyric acid more than whey did. Incubation with postprandial serum resulted in large transcriptomic alterations in serum-fasted HepG2 cells, with the differential expression of >4500 protein coding genes. However, when comparing cells cultivated in fasting serum to postprandial serum after the ingestion of fishmeal and whey, we did not detect any differentially regulated genes, neither with respect to the protein source nor with respect to the time after the meal. The comparable nutrigenomic effects of fishmeal and whey do not change the relevance of fish by-products as an alternative food source.
... Several studies have shown that palatability affects satiation, that is the amount eaten within a meal, with an increased intake as palatability increases [38,39]. As a certain food is eaten, the palatability starts declining and it becomes less likely that it will be eaten, a phenomenon called sensory-specific satiation [40]. ...
Article
Full-text available
Protein is considered the most satiating macronutrient, and its effect on satiety and food intake is source-dependent. For the first time, we compared the effect of the administration of an insect or almond preload, both containing 20 g of protein, on appetite and food intake in human subjects. Participants consumed both foods and a vehicle as a liquid preload on three separate days. They were then offered a breakfast and lunch buffet meal at which food intake was measured. Visual analogue scale (VAS) questionnaires were completed following the three preloads to assess appetite and other sensations. At breakfast, reduced energy intake was observed for both preloads compared with vehicle. At lunch, food intake only differed in the insect group, which consumed more than the vehicle. Insect preload increased the total amount of protein ingested with a slight increase in total energy consumed, differently than almond, which significantly increased total protein and energy consumed. There was no correlation between indigestion-sensation ratings and food intake. Moreover, the insect preload resulted in lower sleepiness and tiredness ratings compared with the almond preload. Thus, insect-derived protein may be suitable as a safe ingredient for snacks intended for elderly or infirm patients who require increased protein intake.
... Fish collagenous preparation of mixed fish and cod, in addition to anti-obesity effects in rats, exerted stimulatory effects on the adiponectin levels in T2D (with/without hypertension) or overweight subjects (Cui-Feng et al. 2010;Hovland et al. 2019;. Cod presented significant anti-obesity effects in different studies by means of reducing body weight and waist circumference, obesity, hunger, prospective foodstuff consumption, energy intake at the evening meal while increasing satiety and fasting adiponectin level in healthy overweight/obese subjects (Borzoei et al. 2006;Gunnarsdottir et al. 2008;Hovland et al. 2019;Ramel, Jonsdottir, et al. 2009;Thorsdottir et al. 2007). While during the first 4-weeks consumption of cod protein (with L/A ratio of 1.47) weight and muscle gain were boosted, fat gain was significantly eased in overweight human subjects (Vikøren et al. 2013). ...
Article
Full-text available
The definition of metabolic syndrome (MetS) fairly varies from one to another guideline and health organization. Per description of world health organization, occurrence of hyperinsulinemia or hyperglycemia in addition to two or more factors of dyslipidemia, hypoalphalipoproteinemia, hypertension and or large waist circumference factors would be defined as MetS. Conventional therapies and drugs, commonly with adverse effects, are used to treat these conditions and diseases. Nonetheless, in the recent decades scientific community has focused on the discovery of natural compounds to diminish the side effects of these medications. Among many available bioactives, biologically active peptides have notable beneficial effects on the management of diabetes, obesity, hypercholesterolemia, and hypertension. Marine inclusive of fish peptides have exerted significant bioactivities in different experimental in-vitro, in-vivo and clinical settings. This review exclusively focuses on studies from the recent decade investigating hypoglycemic, hypolipidemic, hypercholesterolemic and anti-obesogenic fish and fish peptides. Related extraction, isolation, and purification methodologies of anti-MetS fish biopeptides are reviewed herein for comparison purposes only. Moreover, performance of biopeptides in simulated gastrointestinal environment and structure-activity relationship along with absorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion properties of selected oligopeptides have been discussed, in brief, to broaden the knowledge of readers on the design and discovery trends of anti-MetS compounds.
... In terms of human nutrition, of the foods compared here, milk had the closest matching EAA ratio to adult human requirements, followed closely by egg. Boarfish and blue whiting also had EAA ratios that were close to adult human requirements and, interestingly, there have been some studies reporting that fish proteins demonstrate higher satiating effects than other protein sources (Uhe et al., 1992;Borzoei et al., 2006;Pal & Ellis, 2010). Thus far, intervention studies comparing the effects of different protein sources on body weight have proved inconclusive (Gilbert et al., 2011). ...
Article
This study presents data from an in-depth proximate compositional analysis of three marine fish species: blue whiting (Micromesistius poutassou), boarfish (Capros aper) and Atlantic herring (Clupea harengus). These fish contained significant amounts of protein (16–17%), lipids (4–11%) and minerals (2–6% ash). The proteins, particularly from boarfish, had close to optimum amino acid profiles for human and fish nutrition. They compared favourably with other fish species in terms of total lipids and relative concentration of the omega-3 fatty acids docosahexaenoic acid and eicosapentaenoic acid (11.8–13.3% and 5.9–8.1% in triacylglycerols [TG] and 24.6–35.4% and 5.8–12.0% in phospholipids [PL]). Atlantic herring had the highest lipid content among the three fish and was found to contain high levels of PL poly-unsaturated fatty acids, including omega-3 fatty acids. Minerals detected in the fish included calcium (272–1,520 mg/100 g), phosphorus (363–789 mg/100 g), iron (1.07–2.83 mg/100 g), magnesium (40.70–62.10 mg/100 g), potassium (112.00–267.00 mg/100 g), selenium (0.04–0.06 mg/100 g), sodium (218.00–282.00 mg/100 g) and zinc (1.29–5.57 mg/100 g). Boarfish had the highest ash fraction and also the highest levels of all the minerals, except potassium. Atlantic herring had considerably lower mineral content compared with the other two species and, levels detected were also lower than those reported in previously published studies. Heavy metals contents were quantified, and levels were significantly below the maximum allowable limits for all elements except arsenic, which ranged from 1.34 to 2.44 mg/kg in the three fish species. Data outlined here will be useful for guiding product development. Future studies would benefit from considering catch season, sex and developmental stage of the fish.
... Fish and Seafood Protein. Fish has long been considered to have great satiating capacity [107], especially low-fat fish, which has demonstrated a very high SI value [64] and potential for reducing energy intake at the subsequent meal [108]; while fatty fish consumption was associated with increased body weight and waist circumference [109]. Fish satiating capacity is assumed to be related to serotonergic activity induced by high postprandial ratio of tryptophan to neutral amino acids [110], and high n-3 LCPUFA in fish and seafood were shown to effectively reduce hunger and increase fullness sensations [111]. ...
Article
Full-text available
With increasing exposure to eating opportunities and postprandial conditions becoming dominant states, acute effects of meals are garnering interest. In this narrative review, meal components, combinations and course sequence were questioned vis-à-vis resultant postprandial responses, including satiety, glycemic, oxidative and inflammatory risks/outcomes vs. protective principles, with reference to the Mediterranean diet. Representative scientific literature was reviewed and explained, and corresponding recommendations discussed and illustrated. Starting meals with foods, courses and/or preloads high in innate/added/incorporated water and/or fibre, followed by protein-based courses, delaying carbohydrates and fatty foods and minimizing highly-processed/sweetened hedonic foods, would increase satiety-per-calorie vs. obesogenic passive overconsumption. Similarly, starting with high-water/fibre dishes, followed by high-protein foods, oils/fats, and delayed/reduced slowly-digested whole/complex carbohydrate sources, optionally closing with simpler carbohydrates/sugars, would reduce glycaemic response. Likewise, starting with foods high in innate/added/incorporated water/fibre/antioxidants, high monounsaturated fatty acid foods/oils, light proteins and whole/complex carbohydrate foods, with foods/oils low in n-6 polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA) and n-6:n-3 PUFA ratios, and minimal-to-no red meat and highly/ultra-processed foods/lipids, would reduce oxidative/inflammatory response. Pyramids illustrating representative meal sequences, from most-to-least protective foods, visually communicate similarities between axes, suggesting potential unification for optimal meal sequence, consistent with anti-inflammatory nutrition and Mediterranean diet/meal principles, warranting application and outcome evaluation.
Chapter
Seafood is promoted as an important part of a healthy diet. But is it? The science shows that animal seafood consumption is associated with poorer health-outcomes, including diabetes, heart disease and cancer. Seafood from the Chesapeake Bay is also a source of dietary toxins including heavy metals and organic pollutants, as well as cholesterol. Seafood is praised as an excellent source of protein, yet this nutrient is a false idol of nutrition, as most Americans eat twice the quantity they need in their diets. Consumption of animal protein is associated with several adverse health outcomes including cancer and kidney disease. Seafood is rich in omega-3 fatty acids that are promoted as preventative of coronary artery disease, yet findings from extensive studies don’t support the efficacy of taking fish oil supplements. Seafood satiates eaters while providing no dietary fiber, a nutrient critical for health and most often missing in the Standard American Diet. The health benefits of choosing whole plant based foods that are widely available in the Chesapeake Bay region as an alternative to seafood consumption is discussed.
Article
Full-text available
We compared postprandial satiety and plasma amino acid, insulin, and glucose concentrations in six lean male subjects after the ingestion of three types of protein (beef, chicken and fish). Satiety was greater after the fish meal (P less than 0.01). The observed difference in satiety could be correlated with two of the putative satiety signals measured in this study: 1) serotoninergic activity, due to differences observed in the postprandial tryptophan to large neutral amino acid ratio; and 2) digestibility, reflected in the significantly (P less than 0.05) longer time it took for the plasma amino acid concentrations to peak after the fish meal. Correlations between dietary and plasma amino acid concentrations were determined and good correlations (r = 0.90) were observed for essential amino acids other than lysine and tryptophan. There were no differences in insulin or glucose concentrations in subjects after consuming each of the three meals. Whether other differences that we observed, such as increased concentrations of taurine and methionine following the fish meal, had any effect on satiety or were of biological significance is not known.
Article
Full-text available
The aim of this study was to produce a validated satiety index of common foods. Isoenergetic 1000 kJ (240 kcal) servings of 38 foods separated into six food categories (fruits, bakery products, snack foods, carbohydrate-rich foods, protein-rich foods, breakfast cereals) were fed to groups of 11-13 subjects. Satiety ratings were obtained every 15 min over 120 min after which subjects were free to eat ad libitum from a standard range of foods and drinks. A satiety index (SI) score was calculated by dividing the area under the satiety response curve (AUC) for the test food by the group mean satiety AUC for white bread and multiplying by 100. Thus, white bread had an SI score of 100% and the SI scores of the other foods were expressed as a percentage of white bread. There were significant differences in satiety both within and between the six food categories. The highest SI score was produced by boiled potatoes (323 +/- 51%) which was seven-fold higher than the lowest SI score of the croissant (47 +/- 17%). Most foods (76%) had an SI score greater than or equal to white bread. The amount of energy eaten immediately after 120 min correlated negatively with the mean satiety AUC responses (r = -0.37, P < 0.05, n = 43) thereby supporting the subjective satiety ratings. SI scores correlated positively with the serving weight of the foods (r = 0.66, P < 0.001, n = 38) and negatively with palatability ratings (r = -0.64, P < 0.001, n = 38). Protein, fibre, and water contents of the test foods correlated positively with SI scores (r = 0.37, P < 0.05, n = 38; r = 0.46, P < 0.01; and r = 0.64, P < 0.001; respectively) whereas fat content was negatively associated (r = -0.43, P < 0.01). The results show that isoenergetic servings of different foods differ greatly in their satiating capacities. This is relevant to the treatment and prevention of overweight and obesity.
Article
Full-text available
The eating behaviour of 19 normal weight males, 19 obese males, 19 normal weight females and 19 obese females was measured by means of VIKTOR, our version of the universal eating monitor. The total food intake, the duration of consumption, the rate of consumption, the relative rate of consumption and the subjective motivation to eat were measured during five homogenous lunch meals to analyse how these variables were related to body weight or to sex. Furthermore, the stability of the eating characteristics over the five eating occasions were tested with pre-defined criteria of stability. The predictive validity of the variables measuring subjective motivation to eat and forthcoming food intake was also tested. Men ate more food than women; normal weight men by eating for a longer time and obese men by eating faster. Females did not slow down the eating rate towards the end of the meals as much as males did. The obese subjects described themselves as having less motivation to eat prior to meals than normal weight subjects. Total stability, i.e. both relative and absolute stability, for all subjects was present for the eating variables intake of food and eating rate. Of the variables measuring subjective motivation to eat (desire to eat, hunger, fullness and prospective consumption) on visual analogue scales, only the variables desire to eat and prospective consumption predicted forthcoming food intake.
Article
Full-text available
The effects of meal sensory properties (tasty vs. bland) and nutrient composition [high-CHO (carbohydrate) vs. high-FAT] on hunger ratings, blood glucose and free fatty acids (FFA), taste perception, and subsequent food intake, were studied in human subjects. Aspartame and vanilla were used to augment meal palatability, yielding four isocaloric liquid meals: bland-FAT, tasty-FAT, bland-CHO, tasty-CHO. Normal-weight, nondieting young adults consumed each of the meals for breakfast on separate days. The main finding was that tasty versions of high-FAT and high-CHO meals were more satiating than nutritionally identical bland meals, as indicated by a greater decrease in hunger ratings following the tasty meals. Changes in blood glucose and FFA were related to meal nutrient composition, but not to meal sensory properties. High-CHO meals tended to be more satiating than high-FAT meals. Consumption of each of the meals produced a similar decrease in pleasantness ratings of food-related tastes. Intake of carbohydrates was significantly higher at a self-selected lunch 5.25 h following a tasty breakfast. These findings indicate that hunger is decreased to a greater extent by meals flavored with aspartame and vanilla relative to nutritionally identical, unflavored meals. The satiety-enhancing effect of oral stimulation was found for both high-FAT and high-CHO meals.
Article
Full-text available
Protein, generally agreed to be the most satiating macronutrient, may differ in its effects on appetite depending on the protein source and variation in digestion and absorption. We investigated the effects of two milk protein types, casein and whey, on food intake and subjective ratings of hunger and fullness, and on postprandial metabolite and gastrointestinal hormone responses. Two studies were undertaken. The first study showed that energy intake from a buffet meal ad libitum was significantly less 90 min after a 1700 kJ liquid preload containing 48 g whey, compared with an equivalent casein preload (P<0.05). In the second study, the same whey preload led to a 28 % increase in postprandial plasma amino acid concentrations over 3 h compared with casein (incremental area under the curve (iAUC), P<0.05). Plasma cholecystokinin (CCK) was increased by 60 % (iAUC, P<0.005), glucagon-like peptide (GLP)-1 by 65 % (iAUC, P<0.05) and glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide by 36 % (iAUC, P<0.01) following the whey preload compared with the casein. Gastric emptying was influenced by protein type as evidenced by differing plasma paracetamol profiles with the two preloads. Greater subjective satiety followed the whey test meal (P<0.05). These results implicate post-absorptive increases in plasma amino acids together with both CCK and GLP-1 as potential mediators of the increased satiety response to whey and emphasise the importance of considering the impact of protein type on the appetite response to a mixed meal.
Article
Full-text available
OBJECTIVE: How much do the sensory properties of food influence the way people select their food and how much they eat? The objective of this paper is to review results from studies investigating the link between the sensory perception of food and human appetite regulation. CONTENT OF THE REVIEW: The influence of palatability on appetite and food intake in humans has been investigated in several studies. All reviewed studies have shown increased intake as palatability increased, whereas assessments of the effect of palatability using measures of subjective appetite sensations have shown diverging results, for example, subjects either feel more hungry and less full after a palatable meal compared to a less palatable meal, or they feel the opposite, or there is no difference. Whether palatability has an effect on appetite in the period following consumption of a test meal is unclear. Several studies have investigated which sensory properties of food are involved in sensory-specific satiety. Taste, smell, texture and appearance-specific satieties have been identified, whereas studies on the role of macronutrients and the energy content of the food in sensory-specific satiety have given equivocal results. Different studies have shown that macronutrients and energy content play a role in sensory-specific satiety or that macronutrients and energy content are not a factor in sensory-specific satiety. Sensory-specific satiety may have an important influence on the amount of food eaten. Studies have shown that increasing the food variety can increase food and energy intake and in the short to medium term alter energy balance. Further knowledge about the importance of flavour in appetite regulation is needed, for example, which flavour combinations improve satiety most, the possible connection between flavour intensity and satiety, the effect of persistence of chemesthetic sensation on palatability and satiety, and to what extent genetic variation in taste sensitivity and perception influences dietary habits and weight control.
Article
Subjects consumed soup (beef consomme) preloads of a fixed size containing different concentrations of monosodium L-glutamate (MSG). Effects on appetite following these preloads, and when no soup was consumed, were assessed in 3 studies. The soups supplemented with MSG were rated as more “pleasant,” more “savoury” and more “satisfying” than soup with no added MSG. Compared with the no preload condition, consumption of the soups initially reduced appetitive motivational ratings and increased fullness ratings, but did not alter food intake in a test meal begun either 2 or 30 minutes later. This immediate inhibition of subjective motivation to eat was unaffected by MSG concentration. The failure of the soups to reduce subsequent food intake is presumably due to their low energy content (<10 kcal) and indicates that sensory stimulation alone is insufficient to reduce appetite. Indeed, the most important finding concerning MSG showed that motivation to eat recovered more rapidly following a lunchtime meal in which MSG-supplemented soup was served as the first course (compared both with the effect of unsupplemented soup and no preload). It is suggested tentatively that MSG through its stimulation of orosensory receptors and/or by improving the palatability of the soup may have influenced the metabolic disposal of nutrients consumed in the previous meal.
Article
The present study was designed to investigate the effect of the pleasantness of a food on satiation (meal termination) and satiety. It was also studied whether or not the subsequent availability of other attractive foods affected the effect of palatability on intake. In a within-subjects repeated-measures design, 35 (26 female and 9 male) young healthy nonrestrained subjects consumed at lunchtime a preload consisting of tomato soup, and a buffet/test meal consisting of many attractive food items. Three factors were manipulated. The palatability of the preload was manipulated by varying the citric acid concentration of the soup at three levels: 0 (pleasant), 7.5 (less pleasant), and 15 (unpleasant) g citric acid/kg soup. Intake of the soup was either ad lib (for investigation of satiation), or standardized (350 g for women, and 500 g for men; for investigation of satiety). The third factor was the availability of other foods, manipulated by the amount of time between start of preload and start of the test meal (intermeal interval = IMI), which was set at two levels: 15 and 90 min. Subjects rated hunger and satiety feelings, before the preload, and in between preload and test meal. The results showed that the ad lib intakes of the less pleasant and unpleasant soups were about 65 and 40% of the intake of the pleasant soup. Subjects ingested about 20% more soup when the subjects had to wait for the test meal about 90 min, compared to the 15 min IMI condition. The availability of other foods had no effect on the effect of pleasantness on ad lib intake. There was also no effect of the pleasantness on subsequent satiety: hunger ratings and test meal intake were similar after the three standardized soups. One conclusion is that pleasantness of foods has an effect on satiation but not on subsequent satiety. A second conclusion is that people eat more of a food when they know that they have no access to other foods for a particular amount of time.
Article
To evaluate the construct validity of the Three-Factor Eating Questionnaire (TFEQ) in obese men and women. A total of 4377 middle-aged, obese subjects in the Swedish Obese Subjects (SOS) study. The total sample was randomly split into two data subsets and psychometric testing was performed separately in each sample. Multitrait/multi-item analysis was conducted to test scaling assumptions and factor analysis was used to test the factor structure. Measures of mental well-being (MACL, HAD) were used for testing criterion-based validity. The Cognitive Restraint factor was consistently reproduced and scaling analysis demonstrated strong item-scale discriminant validity, while the item-scale convergent validity was unsatisfactory. The internal structure of the Disinhibition scale was weak. Most Disinhibition and Hunger items grouped in one global factor labeled Uncontrolled Eating. A third cluster containing items on Emotional Eating was also identified. The obtained three-factor structure was cross-validated and replicated across subgroups by gender, age and BMI. The original TFEQ factor structure was not replicated. A short, revised 18-item instrument was constructed, representing the derived factors of Cognitive Restraint, Uncontrolled Eating and Emotional Eating. The most efficient items were used to boost both the convergent and discriminant validity of the scales.
Article
Recommendations for increased consumption of protein are among the most common approaches of popular or fad diets. This review summarizes the effects of dietary protein on satiety, energy intake, thermogenesis, and weight loss, as well as its effect on a variety of health outcomes in adults. In short-term studies, dietary protein modulates energy intake via the sensation of satiety and increases total energy expenditure by increasing the thermic effect of feeding. Whereas these effects did not contribute to weight and fat loss in those studies in which energy intake was fixed, one ad libitum study does suggest that a high-protein diet results in a greater decrease in energy intake, and therefore greater weight and fat loss. In terms of safety, there is little long-term information on the health effects of high-protein diets. From the available data, however, it is evident that the consumption of protein greater than two to three times the U.S. Recommended Daily Allowance contributes to urinary calcium loss and may, in the long term, predispose to bone loss. Caution with these diets is recommended in those individuals who may be predisposed to nephrolithiasis or kidney disease, and particularly in those with diabetes mellitus.